Accumulated discontent: what the survey showed
According to the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KMIS), 54% of respondents believe the main reason for the lack of electricity is Russian shelling, from which complete protection is impossible. At the same time, 31% of respondents place the responsibility on the Ukrainian authorities — arguing that preparation for winter and mitigation of the consequences of military strikes was insufficient. Another 7% named insufficient support from Western partners as the main cause, and 7% were undecided.
“54% named the shelling as the main factor, but a significant portion of citizens sees the problem in organization and preparation — this is a signal of falling trust.”
— KMIS, press release
Methodology and important caveats
The survey was conducted by telephone from 26 November to 29 December 2025 among 1,001 respondents aged 18 and over in all regions controlled by the government. Under normal conditions, the statistical margin of error for indicators close to 50% is ≈ ±4.1%. However, in wartime the likelihood of systematic deviations increases — this should be taken into account when interpreting the result.
Why it matters: rationalization of the problem
The gap between recognizing the role of shelling and simultaneously blaming the authorities is explained by two factors. First, citizens’ expectations of the authorities include not only the restoration of the network but also preventive measures — reserves, mobile power sources, and communication practices during outages. Second, there is an informational and emotional component: when people endure cold and darkness, they measure not only the cause but also the sense of care and competence of those managing the crisis.
Political and operational consequences
Low levels of trust have practical consequences: they complicate the implementation of emergency decisions, weaken the public’s readiness to accept difficult compromises, and affect perceptions of international assistance. The Razumkov Centre, in parallel surveys, records that 68% consider combat operations at the front the most important problem, while 30% name disruptions to basic services (communications, water, electricity). These data fit into a broader picture: issues of trust and basic infrastructure affect both security and social stability.
What can be done here and now
Experts and energy specialists recommend focusing on several priorities: transparent communication with citizens about plans and restoration timelines; accelerated modernization of critical infrastructure taking wartime risks into account; deployment of local and mobile power sources; and targeted assistance from partners to strengthen reserves. These steps work not only as technical solutions but also as a factor in rebuilding trust.
Conclusion
The KMIS survey is a signal: most Ukrainians understand the role of shelling, but a significant portion feel the state could have prepared better. For the leadership this is not just statistics — it is a test of governance effectiveness in wartime. Whether declarations about strengthening infrastructure will turn into concrete actions and whether public trust will improve will determine not only political stability but also the country’s operational resilience.
